1 |
Arata Hamada, About the theories of limiting the scope of punishment of accessory, Hogakuseijigakuronkyu, Vol 92, pp.235, 2012.
|
2 |
Kanehiko Toyota, Strafgrund der Teilnahme und objektive Zurechnung, Seibundo, pp 52, 2009.
|
3 |
Kyoto District Court Decision, December 13, Heisei 18, Keisu Vol. 65, No. 9, pp.1609.
|
4 |
MGM Studios lnc. v. Grokster, Ltd., 545 U.S. 913(U.S.2005), Emi Tsubata, Did MGM Really Win the Grokster Case? Intellectual property law and police joural, Vol 11, pp.53, 2006.
|
5 |
Osaka High Court Decision, October 8, Heisei 21, Keisu Vol. 47, No. 9, pp.1635, Yoshiaki Nishigai, Contemporary problems of crime aiding and abetting by neutral behaviors, Unversity of Tokyo law review 5, pp.87, 2010.
|
6 |
Peter Rackow, Neutrale Handlungen als Problem des Strafrechts, S. 281ff, 2007.
|
7 |
Seung Joo Beik, Brief study about the criminal responsibility of P2P service offerer, Bubjo Vol. 57(7), pp.46, 2008.
|
8 |
Seoul High Court Decision, January 12, 2005 (2003 na 21140).
|
9 |
Seoul District Court Decision, May 15.2003 (2001 godan 8336).
|
10 |
SONY Copr. of Amer. v. Universal City Studios, Inc., 464U.S. 417. 1984.
|
11 |
Supreme Court Decision, April 29, 2005 (2003 do 6056).
|
12 |
Supreme Court Decision, December 14, 2007(2005 do 872).
|
13 |
Supreme Court Decision, December 19, Heisei 23, Keisu Vol. 65, No. 9, pp.1308. 2011.
|
14 |
Tokyo High Court Decision, December 10, Heisei 2, Hanreita Vol. 725, pp.246. 1990.
|
15 |
Tsutomu Irie, Responsibility of accomplice of the literary work use, Ritsumeikan Houseironsu, Vol 3, pp.271, 2005.
|